Good post CTR. Re the location impact on development/production cost: you know, when the purchase of Sikorsky by LM surfaced, I thought that eventually LM might well move SA from CT to their Marietta campus, which has the space, right to work state etc.
Re Bell UTTAS proposal: may I use an another term, and apply it to the 1972 Bell RFP response and the SA 2023 response. “ corporate egomania “ i.e., we know better than you, Army. In 1972 Bell proposed the King Cobra teetering main rotor, in spite of the Army’s inclusion of the “ UTTAS Maneuver “ in the RFP, which was beyond that rotors ability, so they didn’t get into the fly-off stage, and in 2023 the SA/LM management essentially told the Army they really didn’t need MOSA-we know better, and the results of that approach ensued.
One wonders if the level of verbiage in the GAO protest denial will result in some changes at SA/LM?
In any event, it has the makings for a great Harvard B-School case study.